linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 1/3] gpu: host1x: Remove implicit IOMMU backing on client's registration

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 24 Oct 2019 20:15:07 +0300
From:   Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@...il.com>
To:     Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>
Cc:     dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/3] gpu: host1x: Remove implicit IOMMU backing on
 client's registration

24.10.2019 16:47, Thierry Reding пишет:
> On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 04:35:13PM +0300, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
>> 24.10.2019 14:50, Thierry Reding пишет:
>>> On Sun, Jun 23, 2019 at 08:37:41PM +0300, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
>>>> On ARM32 we don't want any of the clients device to be backed by the
>>>> implicit domain, simply because we can't afford such a waste on older
>>>> Tegra SoCs that have very few domains available in total. The recent IOMMU
>>>> support addition for the Video Decoder hardware uncovered the problem
>>>> that an unfortunate drivers probe order results in the DRM driver probe
>>>> failure if CONFIG_ARM_DMA_USE_IOMMU=y due to a shortage of IOMMU domains
>>>> caused by the implicit backing. The host1x_client_register() is a common
>>>> function that is invoked by all of the relevant DRM drivers during theirs
>>>> probe and hence it is convenient to remove the implicit backing there,
>>>> resolving the problem.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@...il.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>  drivers/gpu/host1x/bus.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++++
>>>>  1 file changed, 19 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> I don't really want to do this in a central place like this. If we
>>> really do need this, why can't we do it in the individual drivers?
>>
>> Why do you want to duplicate the same action for each driver instead of
>> doing it in a single common place?
> 
> I don't mind doing it in a common place in particular, I just don't want
> to do this within the host1x bus infrastructure. This is really a policy
> decision that should be up to drivers. Consider the case where we had a
> different host1x driver (for V4L2 for example) that would actually want
> to use the DMA API. In that case we may want to detach in the DRM driver
> but not the V4L2 driver.

Okay.